Squadron of Lost WWII Spitfires to Be Exhumed

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
A cache of 20 WW2 British Spitfire fighter planes has finally been located in Burma after 15 years of searching by a 62 year-old farmer turned treasure hunter. The fighters were buried as shipped, still in their crates at the start of the end of World War II and will be exhumed and make their way back to England. There are only 35 Spitfires still flying.
 
yeah, say this the other day

really lucky the old guys mentioned it, we are losing those WWII guys fast now
 
Amazing, I wonder what sort of condition they'll be in when they're dug up. It's a shame there's so few WW2 warbirds still flying, so many of them are magnificent aircraft. Huge powerful engines and loaded with intimidating arrays of guns, really pushing the limits of a technology.
 
Tudz said:
Amazing, I wonder what sort of condition they'll be in when they're dug up. It's a shame there's so few WW2 warbirds still flying, so many of them are magnificent aircraft. Huge powerful engines and loaded with intimidating arrays of guns, really pushing the limits of a technology.
Click to expand...

Judging by the conditions in which they say they were buried and the fact that most of the aircraft is aluminum, chances are that they are in good condition.
 
This is an awesome find. I hope they can get them flying. It's an amazing watching WW2 warbirds flying
 
I just can't see why they would have buried 20 brand new planes. I didn't realize Britain was so well off at the end of the war that they could afford to throw expensive stuff in the trash.
 
Read the article, the planes were outdated in favor or jet planes
 
I guess im thinking too modern as in at least send them back to be scrapped.
 
I love almost any machine from WWII, and this is one of them. Too bad the P-47 Thunderbolt beat her to it.
 
This is awesome...I wonder if the guns are installed? If so they would be the only fully equiped ones in existence.
 
BoogerBomb said:
I just can't see why they would have buried 20 brand new planes. I didn't realize Britain was so well off at the end of the war that they could afford to throw expensive stuff in the trash.
Click to expand...
AFAIK, at the time of the burial, Burma was contested territory between Japan and England. Also, econeomies of scale at the end of the war meant these planes were incredibly cheap. If Japan was attacking the area at the time, it was probably cheaper and quicker to simply bury them.
 
Actually I was in the Conferate Air Force (we restore old WWII aircraft) and did alot of research on this, at the end of WWII there were just shitloads of stuff quickly becoming outdated alot of times stuff was pushed over the side of a ship or just buried in the crates they came in or sold for scrap prices.

There are reports that a bunch of old P-38's are buried somewhere in Orange County CA but sure where as to where I kinda got out of that stuff but yes there are lots and lots of perfectly preserved WWII aircraft just waiting to be dug up.
 
BBA said:
This is awesome...I wonder if the guns are installed? If so they would be the only fully equiped ones in existence.
Click to expand...

http://www.flyingheritage.com/TemplatePlane.aspx?contentId=22

that one flies and has all the guns installed. well ... i can't confirm with 100% certainty that the browning MGs are installed as the red protective tape blocks the gun ports but i'm fairly certain they are. that museum takes authenticity very seriously.
 
I didnt read the article, but this is definitely something that interests me. I hope National Geographic does a series of shows on this. Very very cool stuff.
 
BoogerBomb said:
I just can't see why they would have buried 20 brand new planes. I didn't realize Britain was so well off at the end of the war that they could afford to throw expensive stuff in the trash.
Click to expand...

They were probably with drawling from the area in a hurry and didn't have a chance to put them back together to fly them out of there. Quicker just to use some explosives and blow a giant hole, bury the planes, and cover them up before the enemy moved in or they had to with drawl for whatever reason.
 
RadCliffeX said:
They were probably with drawling from the area in a hurry and didn't have a chance to put them back together to fly them out of there. Quicker just to use some explosives and blow a giant hole, bury the planes, and cover them up before the enemy moved in or they had to with drawl for whatever reason.
Click to expand...

No one reads the article?

The planes were deemed surplus and were buried in Aug., 1945... British military officials decided burying them was cheaper and more practical than bringing them home.
Click to expand...
 
BoogerBomb said:
I just can't see why they would have buried 20 brand new planes. I didn't realize Britain was so well off at the end of the war that they could afford to throw expensive stuff in the trash.
Click to expand...

the globe was awash in suddenly obsolete military hardware, many many tons of vehicles and equipment went in the drink
 
interesting, beautiful planes, also there was a video about some guy barbecuing himself on the left of that page, some interviewed woman says that "theyre clearly not happy about tibet"... no shit bish, really? lol
 
BallerX said:
Judging by the conditions in which they say they were buried and the fact that most of the aircraft is aluminum, chances are that they are in good condition.
Click to expand...

It'd be awesome if they are in flying condition, though I would think it's more likely they'll have corroded in places and need some very thorough inspection. 65 years is a long time. Even if the crates were perfectly sealed, tiny cracks you get from machining become sites of local corrosion that over that many years, even on aluminium, can become serious flaws. Leather would have dried out and the any hint of moisture from it would cause corrosion. It doesn't take much over the course of 65 years to render a plane unflyable, especially when you think just how careful you need to be that there isn't some small corrosion on a major component like a spar that'll cause a wing to fall off under flight conditions.
 
It will be interresting, a lot depends on how they are packed. If they are slathered in cosmoline they might be pristine.
 
CaptNumbNutz said:
AFAIK, at the time of the burial, Burma was contested territory between Japan and England. Also, econeomies of scale at the end of the war meant these planes were incredibly cheap. If Japan was attacking the area at the time, it was probably cheaper and quicker to simply bury them.
Click to expand...

From ye olde article:

The planes were deemed surplus and were buried in Aug., 1945 -- potentially along with another eight later in the year. At that time, propeller planes were falling out of fashion in favor of newer jet-engine designs -- Cundall said Spitfires "were 10 a penny." British military officials decided burying them was cheaper and more practical than bringing them home.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012...t-wwii-spitfires-to-be-exhumed/#ixzz1tPGdfkyP
Click to expand...
 
Tudz said:
Huge powerful engines and loaded with intimidating arrays of guns, really pushing the limits of a technology.
Click to expand...

But if you ever see one of these heritage flybys at an air show that you see just how small a once modern P fighter is to a now modern F fighter.

F22P51640.jpg
 
westrock2000 said:
But if you ever see one of these heritage flybys at an air show that you see just how small a once modern P fighter is to a now modern F fighter.
Click to expand...

Compared to modern fighters it's another thing again, but they're amazingly impressive in their own right. The later P51s you're looking at a 2200hp, 27 litre V12 with a huge 2 stage supercharger for high altitudes which is pushing the limits of what can actually be thrust through a propeller, while firing 1800 rounds from 6 x 0.5 cal Browning machine guns pushing out a combined 80 rounds per second, I'm not sure the weight of the rounds, but that's some 3-5kg (7-11 pounds) of bullets being flung at 900m/s from a plane already flying about 600km/h. Then you have the fact that they were made in massive proportions, 15,000+ P51s were built compared to something like an F16 which was only about 4,500+, and an F22 which has only had about 200 built. P51s shot down some 5000 aircraft over their life.

I dunno about you, but I think those are some mighty impressive facts and as an aircraft enthusiast, I look on WW2 planes with awe and absolutely love the roar of those beastly old engines. They're like the muscle cars of propeller driven aircraft.
 
Original purchase cost of a spitfire was approximately £12,604. The modern equivalent is approximately £424,000. Converting to USD, it's $689,763.

Current cost of an F-22 raptor is $150,000,000. Assuming a squadron size of 12 planes, you could buy 18 squadrons worth of spitfires for the cost of one F-22 raptor.
 
mrtheshaggy said:
Original purchase cost of a spitfire was approximately £12,604. The modern equivalent is approximately £424,000. Converting to USD, it's $689,763.

Current cost of an F-22 raptor is $150,000,000. Assuming a squadron size of 12 planes, you could buy 18 squadrons worth of spitfires for the cost of one F-22 raptor.
Click to expand...

Yep, I'd rather have 216 spitfires than 1 F-22 :p
 
Shame they are Mk.XIV's rather than say Mk.V's. Not really classic Spitfires but still worth preserving if possible.

If nothing else should be some salvageable spare parts.
 
Tudz said:
Yep, I'd rather have 216 spitfires than 1 F-22 :p
Click to expand...

to have? sure...

to fight with? give me the F22

heck... i think a cheaper apache or A10 would probably rock the crap out of even that many spitfires....
 
goodcooper said:
to have? sure...

to fight with? give me the F22

heck... i think a cheaper apache or A10 would probably rock the crap out of even that many spitfires....
Click to expand...

Hmmmm depends how much ammo you have to take out 200+ Spitfires.

One A10 would maybe have the ammo to take out a few but then while he was doing that he would have 200 other 400mph+ capable and pretty manoeuvrable aircraft swarming over his slower aircraft with cannons blazing. Same for the Apache.

Swiss cheese springs to mind.

Sometimes having many more of an inferior design can win the day. It's like WW2 tanks. As one German Tiger commander rightly stated.

"One of our Tiger tanks was worth four of the American Shermans, it was so superior. Unfortunately, the Americans always had five Shermans!"
 
That funny, I thought about what modern planes would be a match for 200 spitfires when I posted that.

Any modern helicoptor would get creamed by 200 spitfires.

The A10 has comparable speed and altitude capabilities to the spitfire. It is probably far less maneuverable too (remember the A10 is a flying tank). It would have the acquire a few spitfire targets from a few miles out, unload it's missiles, and haul ass back to base out of the spitfires range.

The F22 would just stay at 60k feet and pick them off one at a time. When it was out of missiles, it would just fly back to a base that is way the fuck out of the spitfires range.
 
mrtheshaggy said:
The F22 would just stay at 60k feet and pick them off one at a time. When it was out of missiles, it would just fly back to a base that is way the fuck out of the spitfires range.
Click to expand...

Not being up on the missile/weapon tech and that lot. Would the weapons have any trouble locking on to a Spitfire or a p51? I'd assume a smaller heat signature compared to a modern jet engine. No idea what their foot print on a radar would look like. I'm pretty sure there has never been a battle like that ever waged so just curious:D
 
Wyodiver said:
Makes me miss Jane's WW2 Fighters. Great game.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane's_WWII_Fighters

As a a veteran of the USAF, and a wannabe WW2 historian, I love this stuff. I really hope that they can get those planes up in the air.
Click to expand...

Well if they can get a P38 out of frozen tundra flying along with one of the p51's buried with it, then these spitfires shouldn't have any trouble.
 
Very cool find. I love old planes, you had to be a heck of a pilot to be dogfighting like they did back then. Technology has come so far, but I would rather look at one of those classics than a pointy-nose plastic jet any day. Whats interesting to me is working on modern military aircraft and seeing the similarities, the government doesn't like to change things that work already. Heck, my job right now consists of repairing flight instruments and I have a few manuals that date back to the 30's and 40's and the gear is still being used in aircraft today. There is a common wheel and flap indicator that has been in service nearly unchanged since 1941.

r_shortt said:
Not being up on the missile/weapon tech and that lot. Would the weapons have any trouble locking on to a Spitfire or a p51? I'd assume a smaller heat signature compared to a modern jet engine. No idea what their foot print on a radar would look like. I'm pretty sure there has never been a battle like that ever waged so just curious:D
Click to expand...

I'm going to say that the majority of weapons on an F22 will be radar guided, and a WWII fighter more than likely has the radar signature of a barn. Even if they were thermally guided, a hot engine is a hot engine especially when the background temperature is near or below zero at a decent altitude.
 
mrtheshaggy said:
The F22 would just stay at 60k feet and pick them off one at a time. When it was out of missiles, it would just fly back to a base that is way the fuck out of the spitfires range.
Click to expand...
Yeah, need to employ the P51's and P38's to out last it. That'd be an interesting fight, how many P-51's/P-38's can an F22 kill by taking off, using all missiles, landing, and taking off again before the P-51's reach it's base and blow it apart on the runway :D

LigTasm said:
Very cool find. I love old planes, you had to be a heck of a pilot to be dogfighting like they did back then. Technology has come so far, but I would rather look at one of those classics than a pointy-nose plastic jet any day. Whats interesting to me is working on modern military aircraft and seeing the similarities, the government doesn't like to change things that work already. Heck, my job right now consists of repairing flight instruments and I have a few manuals that date back to the 30's and 40's and the gear is still being used in aircraft today. There is a common wheel and flap indicator that has been in service nearly unchanged since 1941.
Click to expand...
The 30s and 40s were really a golden age of aviation. I love reading old aerodynamics papers from back then, they were so simple, often insightful and surprisingly many of them are still relevant now. Designing the aerodynamics for a modern race car I found myself reading a NACA report from 1921.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top